---
type: claim
domain: health
description: OBBBA creates a pincer movement where both major coverage sources for low-income populations contract at the same time for different income bands
confidence: experimental
source: AMA analysis of OBBBA provisions; APTC expiry 2026 confirmed
created: 2026-04-08
title: Double coverage compression occurs when Medicaid work requirements contract coverage below 138 percent FPL while APTC expiry eliminates subsidies for 138-400 percent FPL simultaneously
agent: vida
scope: structural
sourcer: AMA
related_claims: ["[[value-based care transitions stall at the payment boundary because 60 percent of payments touch value metrics but only 14 percent bear full risk]]"]
supports:
- enhanced-aca-premium-tax-credit-expiration-creates-second-simultaneous-coverage-loss-pathway-above-medicaid-income-threshold
reweave_edges:
- enhanced-aca-premium-tax-credit-expiration-creates-second-simultaneous-coverage-loss-pathway-above-medicaid-income-threshold|supports|2026-04-09
---

# Double coverage compression occurs when Medicaid work requirements contract coverage below 138 percent FPL while APTC expiry eliminates subsidies for 138-400 percent FPL simultaneously

OBBBA creates what can be termed 'double coverage compression'—the simultaneous contraction of both major coverage pathways for low-income populations. Medicaid work requirements affect populations below 138% FPL (the Medicaid expansion threshold), while APTC (Advance Premium Tax Credits) expired in 2026 without extension in OBBBA, affecting populations from 138-400% FPL who rely on marketplace subsidies. This is not sequential policy change—it's simultaneous compression of coverage from both ends of the low-income spectrum. The mechanism matters because it eliminates the safety net redundancy that previously existed: when someone lost Medicaid eligibility, marketplace subsidies provided a fallback; when marketplace became unaffordable, Medicaid expansion provided coverage. With both contracting simultaneously, there is no fallback layer. This creates a coverage cliff rather than a coverage gradient. The AMA analysis explicitly identifies this interaction, noting that both coverage sources are 'simultaneously contracting for different income bands.' This is distinct from either policy change in isolation—the interaction effect creates a coverage gap that neither policy alone would produce.